My Life Fighting Judicial Corruption and the Political Subversion of Freedom; keeping in mind Winston Churchill's words: ""All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope"

The ownership of history defines a people and their nation. I am a Southern heir of the Confederacy and the Old South. I will never allow any modern politician to take my grandparents’ love for me or their love for their grandparents’ cause. I spent my elementary school years with a Confederate Flag hanging in my room, and related pictures all over my grandparents’ home and several aunts’ & uncles’ homes. To purge this heritage would mean to purge myself, and, I’m sorry folks, but I just don’t want to be purged.

I took my son Charlie to Beauvoir (and Confederate Memorial Hall) many times when he was living here with me, when he was little. I hope that there are enough people who feel as I do to make sure that my great-great grandchildren will still remember and honor the Lees, the Jacksons (Andrew & Stonewall), Davis, Beauregard, Forrest, the Polks (James K. & Leonidas), and all the other Confederate heroes of the war of 1861-65.

There is a Federal Law of Cultural Resource Management built into the National Environmental Policy Act of 1970 (“NEPA”). In my opinion, the removal of the Four Major Monuments and any other alterations would have a major negative impact on the cultural environment and resources of New Orleans.

It would disturb the management and preservation of all other features of the city to remove these centrally placed and important “monumental” focal points of attention. For all these reasons, removal of the monuments would violate Federal Law and must be opposed in Court if the City Council votes in favor. Oh, and we should campaign vigorously to recall the mayor and all members of the City Council and demand a special election. I, for one, think this is worth fighting for on every front, until the monuments can be secured “for ourselves and our posterity.”

In that rather inglorious imperialist episode, we conquered Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Philippine Islands and Guam from Spain. Of these, we only have Puerto Rico and Guam to show for our efforts now. The Annexation of Hawaii in the same year, 1898, had almost nothing to do with the Spanish-American War, but what the heck, so long as we were out there collecting Tropical Islands generally and Pacific Islands in particular, right?

The Annexation of Hawaii was among the most utterly illegal acts ever committed in the name of the United States of America. Hawaii had been recognized as a sovereign and independent nation, first as the self-governing indigenous Kingdom of Hawaii founded by King Kamehameha, for over 100 years, and then as an Anglo-Saxon Republic after the overthrow of the native Kingship, by all the major powers of the world, including the United States.

In short, the Annexation of Hawaii was as absolutely and totally illegal as Cousin Abe’s war to suppress his own and his wife’s Southern cousins into submission, abject submission, although the Yankee Imperialist Conquest of Hawaii was bloodless and therefore “benign,” right? Still, Hawaii has solid grounds for secession and nullification of its relations with the United States. And I hope that Hawaii will lead the way in the dissolution of the Union. That way the first shot of the next War of Secession doesn’t have to be fired here in the South this time.

(Oh, and that will resolve all questions regarding Barack Hussein Obama’s citizenship, although I, for one, am fairly convinced he was born in Kenya. But since Hawaii was illegally annexed, it’s not part of the United States either, so “two birds with one stone.”)(yes, I am grinning as I write this last parenthetical).

But Why is Barack Obama involved in the renaming of Mount McKinley? Is it because he is bitter about the annexation of his “native” Hawaii? Well, if so, and as noted, I am too.

But I believe, really and truly, that Obama’s purpose in renaming Mount McKinley is part of a broader purpose and policy which stands as the cornerstone of his administration: ALL OF WHITE AMERICA MUST BE SUPPRESSED AND DIE. And McKinley, even if he was a nasty Republican Imperialist just like Abraham Lincoln before him and Theodore Roosevelt after him, was white. And THAT, my friends, is what I would consider to be the real connexion between the renaming of Mount McKinley and the renaming of Lee Circle and Jefferson Davis Parkway…… One less “Monument” to a Dead White Male on the American map.

Obama claims that his purpose in renaming Mount Denali was to honor the Alaskan Athabaskans (Tinneh or Na Diné), who number approximately 6,400 in Alaska today, according to Wikipedia. The total population of Alaska in 2013 was 737,259, and Hispanics outnumber Native Americans almost 3 to 1 as a percentage of the population. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/02000.html

I have no idea how many of these enrolled tribal members actually speak an Athabaskan language, but I am sure it is less than the 6,400 total, and so it is much less than the generation of millions of Elementary School Students who had to learn their American geography and history together.

Wipe McKinley off the map? I would be dishonest and hypocritical to say it were “no great loss”, even though I cannot and do not particularly admire the man or his “legacy.” Because if traditional historical names can be changed for the benefit of tiny minorities…. well, then the 25,000 of us who have signed petitions to save Lee Circle and the Lee and Jefferson Davis Monuments in this city are indeed in a hopeless position.

I am against an “Amendments Convention” as called for by Mark Levin, Rob Natelson and Tim Baldwin. I do not take this position lightly.

Under the United States Constitution, as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, our President and Congress have taken over our banking, unions, businesses, communications, and education. They have created a secret police/national police (TSA, ICE, Border Patrol, etc), and instituted ObamaCare by which government will control all our health care. They have failed to turn over about 25% of the land area of Montana as was agreed to when we became a state.

I agree freedom could be advanced with the proper amendments to the U.S. Constitution. As a state legislator, I have attempted several times to amend the U.S. Constitution in order to place some control over, and limits on, the federal government.

In 2003 I got a bill to repeal the Seventeenth Amendment out of the Senate Judiciary Committee – but it was defeated on the Senate Floor. In the 2005 legislative session I attempted to accomplish close to the same thing by having the Montana legislative caucuses nominate our U.S. Senate candidates to be on the general election ballot.

In the 2013 legislative session, with Senator Verdell Jackson’s brilliantly executed motion for reconsideration in the Senate, I got House Joint Resolution 3 passed. This is a request for a constitutional amendment to put some sideboards on the “Commerce Clause” of the U.S. Constitution. I presently need some help to get other states to advance this concept.

Then why am I against an Amendments Convention? Because I don’t believe the majority of the citizens of the United States currently understand or appreciate Freedom. It is not adequately taught in our schools or churches. Even the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church seems to be ignorant of the fact that capitalism has lifted far more out of poverty than socialism and communism ever have.

Vaclav Klaus, the former Premier of the Czech Republic stated:

“The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.”

While many of us in Montana have known what is happening for many years, we have not hollered loud enough to wake up our neighbors. We have not always supported the candidates who understood the basics of freedom when they were running for our school boards, city councils, county commissioners, state legislatures, judges, congress and president. We have not sent enough letters to the editor speaking up for freedom.

We have been complacent, attending churches where the preachers would not take a stand on Biblical principals of freedom because they were afraid they would loose their parishioners’ monetary support and their federal tax exemption. Many of these churches would not even mention it to their congregations when they knew a political candidate was in favor of government supported abortions.

For years we have watched the Supreme Court put forth immoral, anti freedom and statist decisions , including the Dred Scott decision, the Slaughter House Cases, Wickard v. Filburn, Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority, Gonzales v. Raich, Roe v. Wade, and Lawrence v. Texas. We have allowed the bigs, such as AIG, General Electric, Bank of America and Monsanto, to choose the likes of McCain and Romney to be our presidential candidates. (Will they choose Chris Christie for us this coming election?)

We have known for years deficit financing as advocated by Keynesian economists constitutes theft from our seniors’ retirement accounts and supports the big banks. Yet the public supported the Federal Reserve Act in order to “furnish an elastic currency.”

We have supported our universities where the professors of economics are beholden to the Federal Reserve System as consultants, board members, or for having published their masters or doctors thesis in one of the fed’s magazines.

We have seen the evidence of how the “bigs”, including the pharmaceuticals, banking industry, insurance, unions and other protected industries and professions own the political establishment, but we have not supported the repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment to lessen the bigs’ power and return some semblance of states’ rights.

We have seen socialism advance but have not challenged the expansion of Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, federal intervention in education, food stamps, ObamaCare, and a whole plethora of other government programs.

We have seen the installation of the Real ID act, the Patriot Act, and the National Defense Authorization Act, but, because we were afraid, we kept silent. We accept airport screening and government eavesdropping. We take off our shoes at the airports like good comrades.

The people of Montana believe government can pass laws to make them more affluent. In 2006 we 72.7% of the voters passed Initiative I-151 to increase the minimum wage. By so doing we devalued the dollar and deprived many Indian children on our reservations, where unemployment is over 50%, the opportunity to get their first job. The minimum wage effect on those whom age out of our foster care system is similarly devastating. At the age of 26, 46.8 percent of participants responding to one study were unemployed. We need to make it easier to hire the needy, not remove the bottom rung of their ladder to prosperity.

In our last Montana election we passed initiative I-166 by a 3 to 1 majority. The fuzzy catch phrase with which it was sold to the public was “Corporations are not People.” That was what appeared on the ballot. The rest of I-166, which did not appear on the ballot, called for a repeal of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution! The intent was to abolish the freedoms of speech, press and association that Congress is presently not allowed to interfere with. If I-166 is successful, these freedoms likely will be replaced with statutory rules as Congress sees fit.

While the public remains asleep to the concept of freedom it is too dangerous to make it easier to change the Constitution. Our Constitution contains negative rights, stating what government can’t do to us or take away from us. We are too likely to throw away these “negative rights” contained in the Constitution and Bill of Rights and replace them with “positive rights,” such as a right to: free health care, free child care, living wages, and government controlled food prices.

Maybe the chance to amend positive rights into our Constitution is the reason George Soros, Common Cause, the Move to Amend coalition and hundreds of other progressive organizations are also pushing for an Article V amendments convention.

What are we going to do to save freedom for our progeny? When are we going to stop bowing to the socialists, fascists and communists? When are we going to demand our schools and churches teach and advocate for freedom? When are we going to join freedom fighters holding up signs along the highways criticizing the big government statists and asking for freedom? When are we going to stand up in church and speak up for political candidates who will fight for the Biblical truths and freedoms that our founding fathers fought and died for?

Until the majority of the public understands and believes in freedom an Amendments Convention is more likely to enslave us than to free us. Therefore I am against having one at this time.

My friends and former allies Bob Rivernider and Robert J. Ponte are now in Federal Penitentiaries, sentenced (respectively) to 12 and 7+ years plus five years supervised release. For men near my age, this is a virtual death sentence. LOTS of people die in American prisons….that’s a reality not everyone knows. I did not always agree with these two gentlemen, did not always (well, actually, never) understand their business plans, but one thing I am pretty sure: they are not and never were dangerous criminals. The real question is whether they were criminals AT ALL, in any sense. It seems to me that they are part of a growing universe of white men in white collar positions who are being punished for making bad business decisions. In essence, business failure, like poverty itself, is now a crime in America. In terms of their personalities, Bob Rivernider was gruff and cantankerous—perhaps why he got a 144 month sentence. Robert J. Ponte was much smoother and sweeter—perhaps that why he “only” got 7 1/2 years….

The names “Rivernider” and “Lincoln” have for a long time been hyper-linked in Google Searches, especially if paired with two other search terms: “Palm Beach” and “Orly Taitz.” Ok, we all know that anything that Orly touched in my life was a fricking disaster…. But Orly was not responsible for Bob Rivernider’s troubles—although the real power behind her, namely the lying and deceitful, treacherous American Executive Branch, certainly was.

The Orly phenomenon originated and found extravagant sponsorship in the local Washington, D.C., branch of the Globalist government by financial-military-industrial cartel. This Cartel, official leaders Larry Summers, John Shepard Reed***, Jacob Joseph (“Jack”) Lew, and their crowd of corrupt financiers, designated Orly as their “Clown Princess” and Jester extraordinaire to the Courts in defense of Obama’s qualifications to serve as Chief Executive after having been elected by the Bilderbergers. Orly, as a movement and phenomenon, was created in the brilliant “reverse logic” (Kafkaesque, or more to the point, positively Saul Alinskyesque) defense of Barrack Obama’s citizenship by absurdist attack. Only Orly Taitz’ ludicrous behavior could have made the world safe for Obama, the most Constitutionally unqualified and inappropriate president imaginable. Only Orly could have turned strict construction of the Article II Presidential eligibility clause into the laughing stock of the entire nation, and the world which once again had to endure the shakes of the 6 billion heads who live outside of the boundaries of “E Pluribus Unum” to wonder how Americans could possibly be so stupid and gullible.

This same cartel, for less obvious reasons, apparently found in Robert Rivernider an extreme threat and made him a “high value target” even before I first met Bob in 2008-9 at one or more of Bob Hurt’s seminar/conferences in and around the Tampa Bay Area, Florida. Bob Rivernider now wears an ankle bracelet and has a 7:00 curfew as he awaits final sentencing pursuant to a plea bargain he probably never should have entered. I know a thing or two or three about the U.S. Government’s ability to coerce plea agreements out of innocent people: “you agree to this or you’re going away for life while we impoverish your family” is extremely persuasive, no matter what the truth may be. But in Bob Rivernider’s case—they talked him into going away for life, or something pretty close to it, AS his plea bargain, after he had already started a trial. Since Bob was certainly never going to be subject to the death penalty, it was hard to see how he had struck a good deal here…..so I was anxious to hear his story. I had known and celebrated his birthday with him in 2009, but had forgotten all about it in the intervening years—but right now I can say I am only hopeful that (if there’s anything at all to Astrology, though frankly I doubt there is) my son will turn out to be a man of half the fighting character and spirit of resistance I see in Bob Rivernider. I would like to see Bob Rivernider on his birthday again, maybe before another four years have passed. It would be a bad thing, and a great loss to society, for him to be locked up for the next 25 or 30 of his birthdays. It would be a major miscarriage of justice….

Partly in Honor of my son’s 21st birthday, which I could not share with him because of choices apparently made either by him or his mother, and otherwise partly because of a frivolous motion filed against me in a case in the 15th Judicial Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County, I came back to my old haunts in beautiful Palm Beach 33480 for the first time since just after Easter 2010.

Nobody would say that this is the best, or even a pleasant, time to come to South Florida. Late August is the heart of hurricane season. But even without any hurricanes, South Florida is hotter and more humid than New Orleans, and nowhere near as pleasant as Yucatán, México, in this season. This is true only because it rains so much more in South-pointing Florida’s North-pointing Southern opposite Peninsula just across the Gulf. The greater daily rainfall and cloudcover in México means that the full tropics of Southeastern México are actually cooler than the Florida subtropics just to the north in the USA.

It has turned out to be one of the best and most exciting weekends I’ve had in a very long time, primarily because I met my new lawyer, my new partner and representative, Dara Leigh Bloom, for the very first time when I arrived here Saturday evening, and other my new partner and expert witness in securitization and pooling analysis—Mario Kenny, on Sunday afternoon. It occurred to me while here that although I have worked hard, been worried, and been angry from time-to-time in Palm Beach County, this is one part of the world where I can truly say I have never been really unhappy or deeply depressed.

Sunday morning I got up early and went to 8:00 Holy Communion and Eucharist at Bethesda-by-the-Sea—a Parish Church significantly grander than Christ Church Cathedral in New Orleans, though not even half as old and lacking the same amazing direct connexions to Southern American history. Located just south of the Breakers at 141 South County Road, Bethesda-by-the-Sea is the Church where my son Charlie was Baptized on the Feast of the Epiphany in 1993. It was an honor and privilege to return here, and to sit a while in Bethesda’s beautiful gardens after the 8:00 service was over, contemplating the Rector’s sermon on Sabbath being a time for thinking, reflecting, and doing nothing.

Doing nothing, of course, was not a significant part of the plan for coming to Palm Beach. Just after 10:00 a.m., Bob Rivernider arrived at the Bradley Park Hotel at 280 Sunset, across from Publix and just five very short blocks from our old home here on the Island, where my son Charlie spent just over the full first year of his life, after being born on the eve of Hurricane Andrew while I completed my term as Judicial Law Clerk to Kenneth L. Ryskamp of the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida.

Bob Hurt of Clearwater, old friend, frequent recent critic, whom I had not so long ago written that I disowned writing, “I know thee not old man”….came down with his charming wife Maria to visit for the weekend and argue some more. I had walked to Bethesda before the morning service but by the time it was over, it was too bloody hot to walk back and Bob Hurt did me the courtesy of picking me up.

We arrived back at the Bradley just as Bob Rivernider was pulling up. And then Bob began to tell us his story…. to a small audience consisting of me, Dara Leigh Bloom, and Bob Hurt.

For two and a half hours, Rivernider expostulated to us regarding the devious, manipulative stratagems and trickery that the U.S. Attorneys’ Office (and his own CJA Attorneys) in Connecticut, used to get him, his former partner Robert Ponte, and his sister Lorraine Seneca, to plead guilty almost a month into a jury trial in Hartford, Connecticut.

I can’t say that I really understood Bob’s business before or now. It may have been a good business plan, it may not have been, but what it fairly clearly was, was an honest business plan, even if “high risk” was written all over it. Robert Rivernider and Robert Ponte somehow planned to generate high returns on investments in real estate and foreign exchange swaps to their clients, who invested hundreds of thousands, in some cases millions of dollars.

So far as I can tell, the great sin that Ponte & Rivernider committed in all this was to try to piggy-back on the real estate speculation in which the major banks of the world were so famously engaged in the middle of the first decade of the new Millennium. Because they were doing this, they were apparently “high value” targets to be designated “fall guys” for the fallout and collapse of this speculative roller-coaster. Everyone over the age of 14 knew that ONLY real estate speculation of the wildest and most absurd nature could have driven the market as it climbed up to its peak in 2007, triggering the collapse of 2008-9.

In 2008 the banks of the United States, along with other major industries (e.g. the automobile industry, especially the “Big Three” GM, Ford, & Chrysler) were effectively nationalized—although nobody important or “in control” used that term or word publicly, or if they did, not very much or very often, at least on prime time TV. Yet it was precisely at the end of the W. Bush’s term and the beginning of Obama’s that full scale Socialism was instituted in the USA.

Among the significant but lower profile announcements of the new Obama administration was that the Department of Justice would be going after “White Collar Crime” involved in and relating to the banking collapse. And it was then that Robert Rivernider, Robert Ponte, Lorraine Seneca, and so many others suddenly crossed over from being “the managers of distressed businesses” to “high value targets of criminal investigation.”

As a practical matter, targeting failed business enterprises like the Ponte-Rivernider-Seneca group was a way of declaring war on the White Middle Class which Obama so clearly despises. Ponte-Rivernider-and-Seneca were accused, among other things, of a “scheme to defraud” under 18 U.S.C. §1343 (“Wire Fraud”) of a scheme to manipulate real estate appraisals unrealistically high to obtain greater extended credit leverage from banks. Again, as every person who was at least 14 after 2000 must have known—well over half the population was playing Real Estate Roulette at this time (2000-2007)—not merely with the full cooperation and collusion but egged on by the banks and, for that matter, State and Federal lawmakers and regulators.

Scapegoats are always necessary in such situations—you can’t very well sacrifice the real criminals like Lawrence Summers, John Shepard Reed, and Jacob Joseph Lew, so you look for “little people” like Ponte and Rivernider.

After listening to Rivernider’s story, all I can say is this: (1) the U.S. Attorneys in Connecticut were prosecuting to cover up Bank misconduct and justify bank losses, (2) the C.J.A. (government-paid-defense) attorneys appointed to defend Rivernider at least (he told mostly his own story), were not accidentally incompetent, but active members of the prosecutorial team. Listening to Rivernider, it seemed that his defense team chronically and repeatedly failed to make proper and warranted objections, failed to offer well-founded affirmative defenses, and above all, pushed Rivernider, Ponte, and Seneca to plead guilty BEFORE the U.S. had even rested its case. The defense team did this after announcing that they would put on no defense whatsoever (and hence waiving what could have been a very strong defense on the part of the three defendants).

The U.S. District Court seemed to have cared much more about the jurors’ time and length of trial than whether the Defendants had full and fair opportunity to challenge the facts alleged against them. It seemed that the Prosecution’s consistent strategy was one of deception, disguise, and dissimulation ranging from willfully misrepresenting the obvious meaning of words and phrases in e-mails up to making outbursts in Court which we were taught in law school and bar review courses, and saw as practitioners, would have been grounds for immediate motions for mistrial (e.g. the prosecutor calling out “He’s Lying” during a witnesses’ testimony in front of the jury and later apologizing to the Court). It seemed that the Defense strategy was to meekly accept all prosecutorial misconduct and not to object.

Among the most disturbing direct quotes that Bob gave us were that his attorney told him, “I was hired to get you the best sentence possible” and the prosecutor admitting to the Court that certain behaviors alleged in the indictments forming the basis for a lengthy sentence recommendation were “not per se illegal.”

Bob Hurt chimed in at this point, “what does “not per se illegal” mean?” I opined that “not per se illegal” could be reasonably translated out of prosecutorial lingo into English as “not illegal at all”, i.e. “legal” meaning “the Defendants conduct was in fact lawful and therefore unimpeachable.”

Bob Rivernider says that his PSI “number” is 41, and that the prosecution is seeking a 25-30 year sentence, quite plausible given what I know of the Federal Sentencing guidelines (I think my PSI number was 5-6 when I agreed to give up my law license in Texas in August 2000 but I can’t remember exactly anymore). Bob said that Monday, August 26, 2013, was his 48th birthday. He looks a lot older than that, closer to 58 to me—and he’s significantly grayer than when I last saw him in the Spring of 2010.

Listening to Bob talk on Sunday and then again on Monday, seeing the obvious rage in his face and heart, I tend to think that his cause was just and that he should probably try to withdraw his guilty plea (even though that’s very difficult to do) or do an appeal, conditional or otherwise, on the constitutionality of the proceedings. I think that 18 U.S.C. §1343 has been stretched beyond its reasonable limits. Any law or statute becomes “void for vagueness” if stretched too thin, and “fraud” means very little if it is said that every business deal that turns out bad was “fraudulent”—although this is an argument consistent with Obama’s communistic hatred of free enterprise, which always implies reasonable assumption of risk, even in the simplest and most honest businesses.

To hear Rivernider talk, the government’s case against him sounds flimsy and borderline insane, justifiable only by deep-seated hatred and anxiousness to make him (and Ponte and Seneca) suffer for the government-sponsored, bank sponsored rampage of speculation that led to the financial collapse of 2008-2009 AND (not coincidentally) the election of Barack Hussein Obama.

Bob asked me to try to help him promote “the truth” and all I can say is, that’s the best present I know how to give him, and this little write-up is about the best I can do based on the state of my knowledge at this point. I have not defended Bob’s business plan, but I do not think it was inherently or even tangentially fraudulent, because “fraud” implies (and requires) “intent to deceive as to material facts.”

My only truly analytical thought is this: I wonder whether Bob (& Ponte & Lorraine) would have been prosecuted if he (they) had taken out “business liability insurance” which would have covered all losses, like the Government’s FDIC and similar programs, TARP, for instance, to bail out the banks. Does purchasing insurance against likely losses make one more honest or more obviously aware of the likelihood of loss? Would anyone be willing to ensure real estate practices such as those in which the Banks engaged OTHER than the U.S. Government?

Are we so afraid of the “failures of freedom” and free enterprise that we would or should require every business to carry “loss insurance”, or stay out of business? Is that a productive and constructive way to advance science and industry, or to create new wealth? Or should we point our fingers at the banks, as Rivernider, Ponte, and Seneca, were given some sort of authority to do in February 2013, shortly before the pled guilty.

Rivernider says that his defense attorneys hired a psychiatrist to convince him that he did not understand the wrongfulness of his own conduct, due to a psychological “executive function deficit” of some sort, and that he could receive lenity at sentencing by acknowledging his condition. This, again, is a rather extraordinary element of Rivernider’s story. I had never heard of “executive function deficit” before (although it sounds fairly applicable to about half a dozen recent Presidents I can think of, and several dozen current and recent bank Presidents and high officers).

I strongly doubt, however, on listening to him, Bob Rivernider’s “Executive Function” operates at a lower level than, say Orly Taitz’ or Barack Obama’s—unless surviving and doing what you were assigned to do (e.g. Keep Obama immune from Constitutional attack, in Orly’s case, dismantled the U.S. Constitution as a whole, then institute communism, in Obama’s case) is the SOLE test.

Rivernider’s prosecutors seem to have twisted facts and misrepresented circumstances and presented an altered, fractured, reality consistently enough to the Court as to constitute actual “witness tampering” and obstruction of justice (and only coincidentally, I guess, thereby effecting a denial of due process of law). Orly also has twisted facts, misrepresented circumstances, and presented an altered, fractured, reality to MANY courts. Orly has done so quite incompetently, although as noted above, her monotonously consistent incompetence appears to have been her intentional modus operandi and raison d’etre, and Rivernider’s defense attorneys seem to have done something quite similar, or aided and abetted the prosecution to do so.

My friends, as I have written on these pages many times before, do not judge harshly anyone you know or hear of who is prosecuted these days. “Everybody knows that the system’s rotten.” Good people go down every day, and the American jails are filled with innocent people, whom you might be proud to know and happy to have to your home as guests. The American Criminal Justice system is BROKEN, CORRUPT, and needs to be torn down to the ground and rebuilt from the bottom up—if at all.

Perhaps the power to identify, prosecute, and punish criminals should be returned to the people, as it was throughout history, essentially until the 20th century, everywhere.

***”There’s no clearer example of the collusion between government and corporate finance than the Citicorp-Travelers merger, which — thanks to the removal of Glass-Steagall — enabled the formation of the financial behemoth known as Citigroup. But even behemoths are vulnerable; when the meltdown hit, the bank cut more than 50,000 jobs, and the taxpayers shelled out more than $45 billion to save it.” http://billmoyers.com/segment/john-reed-on-big-banks-power-and-influence/

I was an “Honors Program” Freshman undergraduate at the College of Arts & Sciences at Tulane University in New Orleans in 1975-76. That meant that in my second semester of Freshman year, I got to take one senior and two graduate level classes. The two graduate level classes were “Crisis in Culture as Reflected in Modern Literature”, taught by the Mellon Professor of the Humanities, Cleanth Brooks, (1906-1994). The other course was “Ethnic Relations, Conquest, and Colonialism” by Dr. Victoria Reifler Bricker (1940- ), then a young associate professor of Anthropology with a Harvard Ph.D. who wore rather (even for the mid 1970s) scandalous mini-skirts every day to class (a detail no straight male college Freshman could ignore or forget).

Bricker and Brooks were in some ways as different as people could be. But in other ways they complemented each other: they both articulated and affirmed the important relationship between race and culture in history. Cleanth Brooks was one of the great Southern Literary Critics of all times (a founder of “New Criticism”, author of “the Well-Wrought Urn”, and an ally of the Southern Agrarians, John Crowe Ransom, Andrew Lytle, and Donald Davidson, Vanderbilt “Fugitives” Allan Tate, Robert Penn Warren, and their later associates Walker Percy). Bricker was, I believe, actually born in China or to Chinese missionaries of some sort.

I just about have to disown my friendship with Bob Hurt. Even before today I had written to him, in King Harry’s words to Jack Falstaff, “I know thee not old man, fall to thy prayers; How ill white hairs become a fool and jester!”

Twice in the past day, Bob has published two articles on “Lawmen”, Numbers 5472 and 5476, 10-11 August 2013, ” with the phrase “Negro Thuggery“ in the title. I disown this sort of writing. It is not only not mine, it is nothing I want to be associated with. Bob Hurt has been a friend, faithful and true to me (sometimes) but I cannot tolerate his hypocritical, ignorant, mish-mash of quasi-Neo-Nazi racist and pro-Constitutionalist ravings. Bob wrote recently that the post-War of Secession “Reconstructed” period of 1865-1914 was the best period of American history. Really Bob? You’re a southerner and you think this? REALLY? You believe that the era of the Robber Barons when our grand-daddies could press down upon labor a crown of thorns and crucify mankind upon a cross of gold were the BEST years in American History? The old man in Clearwater has clearly lost at least a few of his marbles…..

Writing about “Negro Thuggery” amounts to throwing out fighting words in Obama’s America and are about as likely as Al Sharpton’s speeches or Charles Manson’s rantings from prison to produce any positive effect. Neither Jared Taylor nor anyone writing for American Renaissance write or speak this way, even as they aspire to awaken a sense of “racial realism” in America—whether they have achieved anything or not being a totally separate issue.

First off, such phrases as “Negro Thuggery” amount to rude, crude, and uncivilized writing. I do not endorse censorship or doctrines of “political correctness” by any stretch of the imagination, but I do not think that using these kinds of labels in public makes it any easier to engage in rational dialogue about either race or crime in America in August 2013. And I do agree we need rational dialogue about crime and race in America. But, whether Bob Hurt or I like it or not, we have a half-white (“Mulatto”) President whose father was an anti-White, anti-British, pro-Communist terrorist in Kenya, either a member or an ally of the feared and despised “Mau Mau”, and whose mother was, like me, an anthropologist, but unlike me was also a weak-minded communist who used her relationships with men, apparently, to promote her revolutionary anti-white agenda (at least if the movie “Obama 2016” is to be believed).

Obama’s 50% mix of white and “Negro Blood” is probably about the same as Trayvon Martin, a fact on which the President, to his own MASSIVE discredit, has been trying to capitalize on politically. The President has a more debased and corrupted sense of justice and constitutional authority that I would ever have dreamt possible in any holder of high office in this country.

Second, Bob Hurt is just being a terrible hypocrite here. I have known Bob personally and he has black friends and black relatives (in-laws mostly, I believe) who would probably be deeply offended by his use of such epithets. Bob Hurt is utterly unqualified to be a racist on personal grounds, and he lacks the academic background in either law or anthropology or biology to realize how wrong he is about eugenics and his advocacy of forced sterilization and controlled reproduction as solutions for any of the problems he describes. Jared Taylor and some of the writers at American Renaissance seem to be tiptoeing on the edge of endorsing eugenics or forced sterilization. I would never endorse or tolerate any such governmental interference with individual human life or liberty. I could not possibly do so—I have seen too much of the stupidity of government, and too much injustice and error in the courts.

As I have learned, observed, and seen first hand from personal experience, ordinary civil and criminal process in the courts simply result in MUCH too much inequity, injustice, and downright horrible outcomes to permit the Courts to go any farther than they already do interfering in people’s lives. We need to cut WAY back on government, perhaps abolishing the current government all together and starting over. But we should never think of empowering it be allowing anyone in government to try to play God and supervise or guide the course of human biological evolution. They have made enough of a hash out of their social engineering attempts, most if not all of which I totally oppose and despise.

I have previously criticized and tried to distance myself from Bob Hurt’s bigoted and downright reprehensible advocacy of 1920s-30s style forced sterilization as a solution to what he calls the “Negro Crime Wave”—I have sat outside jails with Bob in Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties waiting for one of his dark-skinned nieces to be released from custody for her criminal cavortings with people of even darker skin. Should not this close proximity to the people he condemns make Bob more sympathetic rather than critical and sanctimonious?

There are many causes of high crime rates among African-Americans—but the basic cause was the abolition of chattel (property-based) slavery and its replacement with the 13th Amendment which only permitted slavery “as a punishment for a crime.” Americans have to own up to themselves as a nation of Bob Hurts who want slavery badly—they just want to pretend that it is just. The high (one could say “mass” incarceration rates of black males results directly and consequentially from the successive abolition of slavery and segregation.

I do not accept or believe for a moment that black people are more criminally inclined than whites. In not so ancient U.S. and U.K. history, it used to be accepted and common knowledge that the Irish, Italians, and Jews were chronically criminal and deviant, but nobody seems to remember or believe that anymore, and even people like Bob Hurt (including Bob Hurt himself) acknowledge that Jews have superior “group average” scores on IQ tests than non-Jewish whites, for whatever that is worth, at the same time as he says that blacks should be sterilized on account of their low IQs and criminal tendencies.

There are direct correlations between IQ and socio-economic status, within ethnically homogeneous groups (such as the Nazi High Command, as tested at their trials at Nuremberg, for example, running from 143 (the financial and banking genius Hjalmar Schacht), and 142 (the equally brilliant Austrian lawyer and jurist Arthur Seyss-Inquart) to poor old Julius Streicher at 106—the most like Bob Hurt of the lot, a vulgar anti-Semite who run a couple of news rags for the NSDAP and never knew when to shut up.

To the degree that there are inter-ethnic group differences in IQ, I still believe that this is cultural, because after many years of considering the question I consider it inconceivable that there is such a thing as “untutored innate human intelligence”, i.e. any intelligence which is NOT created by parents primarily and/or educators in their children. I have recently discussed this question at length with a New Orleans psychologist (Dr. Robin Chapman), and the reason that IQ tests correlate well with success in school is that IQ scores test school-taught subjects. Manual dexterity, the earliest use of the human brain which distinguishes us from animals by our envisioning and creation of tools as “extrasomatic adaptations to the environment”, is certainly not a matter of IQ, for example. So the key survival techniques to exist in the “uncivilized” human societies of palaeotechnic prehistory (i.e. Stone Age chipping stone tools, making good fires, fletching straight and sharp arrows, and later forging and using swords and spears of iron and fitting out good Phoenician or Roman ships and Viking longboats, for example) are completely outside the realm of Intelligence Quotient testing.

African cultures up through and until the 19th century dawn of Colonialism had achieved just as high levels of proficiency in iron age technology as had their European Counterparts up to and including the early phases of pre-Roman society in Italy or “mainland” Germanic or Viking society (although the native Africans did engage in some fairly extensive coastal and riverine trade by boat in precolonial times, especially in East Africa on the Indian Ocean side, influenced by Arab sea-farers).

Literate Civilization never independently evolved in Sub-Saharan Africa, and in pre-Colonial times never even extended further south than Ethiopia by diffusion. This lone fact, probably more than any other single historical reason, explains why blacks do not score so well on IQ tests—literate schooling in the Western tradition neither formed part of their cultural nor evolutionary heritage—but that doesn’t make them criminals or stupid, it makes them DIFFERENT.

And it is the study of the function and meaning of human differences which concern us today in America.

I have a Ph.D. in Anthropology from Harvard University, and the title-subject of my doctoral dissertation was “Ethnicity and Social Organization”. I was and remain interested in the question of the reality of ethnic differences and the dynamics of interaction between groups. “Ethnicity”, across the world, operates largely a mythological construct and ethnic conflict operates as a metaphoric system whose sole purpose, in a virtually monolithically homogeneous society, to maintain social hierarchy. “Ethnicity” in Europe denominates cultural differences based on linguistic-nationality, as between French and German, German and Czech or Polish, English and Irish, Italian, Spanish, Yugoslav and Greek. Looking at the maps of Europe, the Near East, and Latin America today, I think this operational, functional approach to ethnicity as mythology still works. In short, “ethnicity” and “class” match each other more closely than “ethnicity” and “population biology” in terms of human genetics.

In the United States, we have something called “Race” which both sounds simultaneously deeper in terms of genetics than “ethnicity” and harder to miss on the surface, because “race” implies skin colour. World culture has evolved into a fundamentally global phenomenon. Based on what people wear and use, in terms of material culture (a subject on which I focused in my doctoral dissertation, which focused on artistic and historical portrayals of different groups—whether ethnic or not), it is hard to distinguish the “races” of North America.

In North America, our 21st century usage of the term “race” implies fairly strong dividing lines between (1) how people identify themselves, (2) how other people identify them, (3) patterns of behavior, (4) social and cultural values, (5) residence.

In the aftermath of Time Magazine’s cover Story “After Trayvon” (nearly a special issue devoted to the subject of George Zimmerman’s Acquittal, dated July 29, 2013) showing his ghostly “hoodie”, I think it is critical to address the subject of race, which is everywhere in the news and commentary on America.

Most of what I see is unadulterated hogwash from ALL sides of the debate. I will start off with the very simple stuff which will permit you to classify me as your ally or enemy, depending on how you feel. In addition to my Ph.D. from Harvard, which I do not use professionally except to think, I have a J.D. from the University of Chicago, which I also do not use professionally except to think.

My legal, academic, and personal background lead me to the inescapable conclusion that George Zimmerman’s acquittal was completely proper, George Zimmerman acted in self-defense, and Trayvon Martin was a punk kid, neither the best nor the worst of his kind, who may not have deserved to die for anything he did but really has no complaint (under the circumstances) about being shot when he pinned down a guy on a sidewalk with something less than humanitarian intent or expressions of Christ-like sympathy for his victim….. In my opinion, George Zimmerman also, was neither the best nor the worst of his kind, something slightly better than a punk kid, possibly a failed cop and aspiring neighborhood bully who never quite made it. The battle between Zimmerman and Trayvon was hardly worthy of inclusion in any heroic series about Achilles, Hercules, or Odysseus, but one COULD get confused on that point, reading the news both in print and on-line these days.

But George Zimmerman committed no mortal sin in shooting Trayvon, and the fact that this is all not just news but DIALOGUE on an EPIC PROPORTION in America is symptomatic of a very sick, disturbed society.

Up one minor notch on an increasing scale of complexity, from the discussion of Zimmerman’s acquittal is the question of whether there is too much violence in modern society. The acquittal was exactly as simple as the jury made it: self-defense, justified under the circumstances including but not limited the fact that he was attacked and had no duty to retreat under the laws of the State of Florida—NO HUMAN BEING SHOULD EVER HAVE A DUTY TO RETREAT WHEN ATTACKED, in my opinion). So now, must we discourage violence? I think the answer is NO, we must train people how to prepare for and engage in duels to resolve their disputes—observed by, but not carried out by, society as a whole.

As a lifelong student of Anthropology, Biology, Classics, Economics, Geography, and History, I know that violence is an essential aspect of the condition known as “animal life”, generally, but especially “human life” in particular. As a strictly theoretical matter, but also in practice, I strongly favor personal violence over group violence. From a biological standpoint, personal (individual-on-individual violence is so much easier to understand and situationally justify).

Imagine trying, if you will, what it would take to convince a group of Male and Female Lions, for example, that the Death Penalty makes sense: Scar killed Mufassa, so to retake his father’s kingdom, Mufassa’s son Simba kills Scar. Lions could probably understand that story. But what if Simba had died in the stampede or the jungle? Should Rafiki the Baboon Priest somehow have assembled Sarabi (Mufassa’s widow), Nala, and enough other female lions and possibly other “food” animals to arrest, pass judgment on and execute Scar for Mufassa’s murder? (Priestly and judicial roles are closely related, from an evolutionary standpoint—even today, Priests and Judges are united in wearing anachronistic black robes in public for ritual purposes).

I will come back to the “Lion King” plot-line later, but from the standpoint of non-human animals who NEVER operated that way, the human “justice” system looks pretty ridiculous and frankly, unnatural and counterproductive. After substantial experience in the law from the perspectives of both judicial chambers and litigants, I question how much sense it makes for humans to operate that way: personal knowledge and experience are a much more reliable index of who deserves to live or die. No less an authority than my grandmother taught me this, although she phrased it in terms of kinship, “If close relatives don’t know who deserves to live or die, nobody else does either.”

Personal justice is better than, morally superior by far to collective social justice in my opinion, and accordingly, personal violence should be encouraged. This is true because, if lawful, the credible threat of immediate retribution will actually make for a more peaceful, cooperative society. That was why murder led to feuds among the Vikings and Scots and their descendants in the Blue Ridge Mountains and Appalachia generally: death by intentional violence was so rare that everybody knew who was responsible and why it happened when it did.

But does Trayvon’s Ectoplasmic Hoodie Really Rate a Full Cover Treatment on Time Magazine? Does Trayvon Martin really belong among the ἀθανάτοιθεοὶ? (the “deathless Gods” as described in Homeric idiom)? At least seven contributors to the July 29, 2013 issue seem to think so. I do not intend to join them.

As a matter of fact, I think that what our so-called President and his propagandists (and I suppose I have to include Time Magazine in this list) have done to try to promote race conflict and racial tension. It makes me ill.

The United States Communist Manifesto

The Communist Manifesto is a desired description of the government (corporate) control of a society, and for that mater the world, written in German by Messrs. Karl Marx and F. Engels but published first in London in February 1848, and continually in print, ever since.

Karl Marx describes in his communist manifesto, the ten steps necessary to destroy a free enterprise system and replace it with a system of omnipotent government power, so as to effect a communist socialist state. Those ten steps are known as the Ten Planks of The Communist Manifesto…

Karl Marx designed these planks as a test to determine whether a society has become communist or not.

As if to give credence to these 10 pillars of a society completely controlled by the State (communism), past and present presidents of the United States Corporation have and continue to pass presidential directives, which bring these planks of communist doctrine to reality… in the state of a declared emergency. While these “directives” scared me before, the realization that they coincide so perfectly with the communist/fascist doctrine of Marx brings this to a whole new level.

These “10 Planks” written in the Communist Manifesto are listed in blue below. Underneath each “plank” is the Presidential Directives, Executive Orders, congressional acts, constitutional amendment, etc. that has made each plank of the Communist Manifesto into law. This is not good.

– Executive Order 12919 –The president would put the United States under total martial law and military dictatorship, in case of a declared emergency.

≈–1–≈

1)Abolition of private property. Abolition of private property and the application of all rents of land to public purposes.

– The Patriot Act – Allows law enforcement to conduct warrentless searches of your records and place of residence, and to confiscate your personal property without your knowledge or consent.

≈–2–≈

2)The income tax.A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

– The Emergency Banking Act – President Roosevelt declared the United States Federal Government dissolved by being bankrupt and insolvent.

– House Joint Resolution 192, 73rd Congress – Suspended The Gold Standard and Abrogated The Gold Clause. Dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments.

– Sixteenth Amendment (Amendment XVI) – Allows the Congress to unconstitutionally levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states or basing it on census results. “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

≈–3–≈

3) Abolition of estate. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

– Probate Laws and Taxes – The application of estate tax, property tax, and the limiting of and reassigning of property values, as well as other state and federal taxes are all aspects of this.Also, you do not own the property in which you live nor the land it sits upon. You are permitted through contract (title/deed) with the State to occupy said dwelling. It can be taken away at any time through eminent domain, or through bank contract if a loan is defaulted upon. Read your title and deed and these facts will become apparent.

≈–4–≈

4) Confiscation of property.Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

– Executive Order 10998 – Allows the government to seize all means of transportation, including personal cars, trucks, and vehicles of any kind.

– Executive Order 11310 – Grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

– Eminent Domain – The inherent power of the State to seize a citizen’s private property, expropriate property, or seize a citizen’s rights in property with due monetary compensation, but without the owner’s consent. The property is taken either for government use or by delegation to third parties (corporations) who will devote it to public or civic use or, in some cases, economic development. The exercise of eminent domain is not limited to real property. Governments may also condemn (exercise power of eminent domain to transfer title to the property from its private owner to the government) personal property, such as supplies for the military in wartime or franchises. Governments can even condemn intangible property such as contract rights, patents, trade secrets, and copyrights.

–International Emergency Economic Powers Act(IEEPA) –A UNITED STATES Federal Law allowing U.S. presidents to identify any unusual extraordinary threat that originates outside the UNITED STATES and to confiscate property and prohibit transactions in response. In the UNITED STATES CODE the IEEPA is TITLE 50, SECTIONs 1701-1707.Enables the President to seize the property of a foreign country or national. These powers were transferred to FEMA in a sweeping consolidation in 1979.

– National Security Presidential Directive (NSPD) 51 – Allows the president to control and coordinate all three brances of government (to become king) in the event of a “catastrophic emergency”. Thus, no judicial review or jury trial will be available, thus property disputes will be squashed by the king or his minions.

– The Military Commissions Act – Strips the courts of jurisdiction to hear or consider habeas corpus appeals of anyone held in U.S. Custody as an “unlawful enemy combatant” or “rebels”. Also prohibits any person from invoking the Geneva Conventions or their protocols as a source of rights in any action in a U.S. court.

≈–5–≈

5) A central bank.Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.

– Executive Order 11921 – Allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to take control of all financial institutions in the United States, and allows government to control the mechanisms of production and distribution of energy sources.

– Federal Reserve Act – Act of Congress that created the Federal Reserve System, the central banking system of the United States of America, which was signed into law by President Woodrow Wilson.

≈–6–≈

6) Government control of communications and transportation.Centralization of the means of communications and transportation in the hands of the State.

– Executive Order 10990 – Allows government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

– Executive Order 10995 – Allows government to seize and control all communications media (telecommunications, internet, radio, television, etc…)

– Executive Order 10997 – allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels, and minerals.

– Executive Order 11002 – Allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.

– Act of August 29, 1916 –Authorizes the Secretary of the Army, in time of war, to take possession of any transportation system for transporting troops, material, or any other purpose related to the emergency.

≈–7–≈

7) Government ownership of factories, land, and agriculture.Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

– Executive Order 10999 – Allows the government to take over all food resources and farms.

– Executive Order 11005 – Allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways, and public storage facilities… public or private.

– 1950 Defense Production Act – Gives the President sweeping powers over all aspects of the economy.

≈–8–≈

8) Government control of labor – creation of government labor armies.Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

– Executive Order 11000 – Allows the government to mobilize citizens into work brigades under government supervision.

– H.R. 3590: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obama-Care), page 1312, SEC. 5210. ESTABLISHING A READY RESERVE CORPS, and SEC. 203. COMMISSIONED CORPS AND READY RESERVE CORPS –Establishment of a commissioned Regular Corps and a Ready Reserve Corps for service in time of national emergency. The purpose of the Ready Reserve Corps is to fulfill the need to have additional Commissioned Corps personnel available on short notice (similar to the uniformed service’s reserve program) to assist regular Commissioned Corps personnel to meet both routine public health and emergency response missions. The Ready Reserve Corps shall participate in routine training to meet the general and specific needs of the Commissioned Corps be available and ready for involuntary calls to active duty during national emergencies and public health crises, similar to the uniformed service reserve personnel, be available for back-filling critical positions left vacant during deployment of active duty Commissioned Corps members, as well as for deployment to respond to public health emergencies, both foreign and domestic; and be available for service assignment in isolated, hardship, and medically under-served communities (as defined in section 399SS) to improve access to health services.Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall be appointed by the President and commissioned officers of the Regular Corps shall be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.Effective on the date of enactment of the Affordable Health Choices Act, all individuals classified as officers in the Reserve Corps under this section (as such section existed on the day before the date of enactment of such Act) and serving on active duty shall be deemed to be commissioned officers of the Regular Corps. So those “Commissioned Officers personally appointed by Barack Obama without advice and consent of the Senate automatically become a part of the Regular Corps.Translation: a presidential army, which will most likely not be bound by any oath to the constitution, but may be bound by an oath to the president.

≈–9–≈

9) Corporate farms and regional planning.Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries, gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equitable distribution of population over the country.Note: This is a part of Agenda 21…

– Executive Order 11002 – Designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.

– Executive Order 11004 – Allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, to designate public lands and areas to be abandoned, and to establish new locations for populations.

– National Security Act of 1947 – Allows for the strategic relocation of industries, services, government and other essential economic activities, and to rationalize the requirements for manpower, resources and production facilities.

≈–10–≈

10) Government control of education. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.

– Executive Order 11001 – Allows the government to take over all health, education, and welfare functions.

– Mandatory Government Education –Public education is schooling mandated for or offered to all children by the government, whether national, regional, or local, provided by an institution of civil government, and paid for, in whole or in part, by taxes. The State of Massachusetts enacted mandatory government sponsored education in 1852. Mississippi was the last state to enact a compulsory attendance law In 1918. Public education involves compulsory student attendance until a certain age or standard is achieved, government certification of teachers and curricula to ensure learning structure and materials are State approved, and government testing and standards for citizens, to ensure indoctrination-like education into the system of debt-enslavement and ignorance of corporate government and actual history is achieved. Homeschooling is now demonized, and has even been made illegal in some states.

One “event” is all it will take, real or false-flag.

And a national emergency will be declared.

Obama will become king, overseen and controled by an oligarchy of elites.

In the Wall Street Journal, and on other sites, it is apparent that Hawaii’s multi-racial paradise in the tropics, which gave us the multi-racial/mixed race Presidency of Barack Obama, suffers from festering racial wounds. Whether he was born in Mombasa, Kenya, as Lucas D. Smith has shown is most likely, or in Honolulu, as the so-called 44th President claims (even after his supposedly legitimate re-election would seem to moot the question forever except as a historical exercise), Barack Obama supposedly represents simultaneously the retreat of colonialism and the end of racism—at least of white racism. But anti-white racism seems to be allowed and actually encouraged.

Part of the purpose of my visit to Hawaii now in the late Autumn of 2012 is to educate myself about the tropical polyglot multi-racial society in Hawaii. I am told the Courts on this island are “conservative”, but by that I understand to mean that the children of Plantation workers favor the Corporate life and Corporate ownership of property against the individual…. i.e. “Conservatism” may mean something more like “Communism” here…. We shall see. But Hawaii is definitely the only place with more ostensible “racial diversity” than even Los Angeles, and the most governmental control over land use and distribution of any state in the Union….. We all do need to understand this….. what is the correlation between multi-racial society, corporate ownership, and communistic tendencies in government….. But in any case:

How terribly ironic that Hawaii, the only state of the United States ever to have had an established presence within the community of nations besides Texas, much more durable than the “Republic of West Florida” or even the easily remembered (because of the State Flag) “Bear Flag Republic of California”, has only garnered 4,150 signatures as of 11:27PM after my arrival at Kahului airport on Monday, November 26, 2012. Not only does Hawaii have a more active secessionist movement than any other state including Texas, but this movement was only just recently received attention, if not exactly “celebrated” in the popular media by a “not so favorable” mention in Dinesh D’Souza’s Obama 2016). Yet still, Hawaiians are not signing on at the White House Petition site: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/peacefully-grant-state-hawaii-withdraw-united-states-america-and-create-its-own-new-government/kfvFZyfw.

While secessionist fever has gathered over 117,000 signatures in my native Texas and over 37,000 in my grandmother’s native Louisiana, Hawaii has gathered separationist signatures on the level of Maine, Maryland, and Massachusetts—New Mexico with 5,155 and Nebraska with 7,284 have outbid Hawaii all together.

WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:

Peacefully grant the State of Hawaii to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for a people to dissolve political bands which have connected them, the separate and equal station to which Laws of Nature and God entitle them, respect requires they should declare the causes which impel them to separate.

Governments instituted derive their just powers from consent of the governed. Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to abolish and institute new Government.

Whereas, people of Hawaii recognize America guilty of unlawful occupation and request peaceful solution being of sound resonance to secede from said union of America, to build a government that better suits inhabitants of Hawaii with alliance to the United States of America.

Why the GOP won’t challenge vote fraud

It’s major duct tape time ’cause you’ll need it to keep your head from exploding.

Are you ready for this?

Here we go….

There is now compelling and undeniable evidence that MAJOR vote fraud had been perpetrated in the November 2012 Election. See FOTM’s posts chronicling the extensive pervasive fraud by going to our “2012 Election” page below our FOTM masthead, and click on those post links colored neon green.

But our screaming and hollering are to no avail. No one is listening to us. Not even the Republican Party.

Here’s why….

The Republican Party made an agreement 30 years ago with the Democrat Party NOT to ensure voting integrity and NOT to pursue suspected vote fraud.

PolitiJim writes for Gulag Bound, November 13, 2012, that during the weekly True the Vote webcast, Catherine Engelbrecht related a meeting she had withReince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC), asking what the GOP would do about voter integrity. The answer?

In 1981, during the gubernatorial election in New Jersey (NJ), a lawsuit was brought against the RNC, the NJ Republican State Committee (RSC), and three individuals (John A. Kelly, Ronald Kaufman, and Alex Hurtado), accusing them of violating the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 1971, 1973, and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.

The lawsuit was brought by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the NJ Democratic State Committee (DSC), and two individuals (Virginia L. Peggins and Lynette Monroe).

The lawsuit alleged that:

The RNC and RSC targeted minority voters in New Jersey in an effort to intimidate them.

The RNC created a voter challenge list by mailing sample ballots to individuals in precincts with a high percentage of racial or ethnic minority registered voters. Then the RNC put the names of individuals whose postcards were returned as undeliverable on a list of voters to challenge at the polls.

The RNC enlisted the help of off-duty sheriffs and police officers with “National Ballot Security Task Force” armbands, to intimidate voters by standing at polling places in minority precincts during voting. Some of the officers allegedly wore firearms in a visible manner.

To settle the lawsuit, in 1982, the RNC and RSC entered into an agreement orConsent Decree, which is national in scope, limiting the RNC’s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court’s approval in advance. The following is what the RNC and RSC, in the Consent Decree, agreed they would do:

[I]n the future, in all states and territories of the United States:

(a) comply with all applicable state and federal laws protecting the rights of duly qualified citizens to vote for the candidate(s) of their choice;

(b) in the event that they produce or place any signs which are part of ballot security activities, cause said signs to disclose that they are authorized or sponsored by the party committees and any other committees participating with the party committees;

(c) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their agents or employees to remove or deface any lawfully printed and placed campaign materials or signs;

(d) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their employees to campaign within restricted polling areas or to interrogate prospective voters as to their qualifications to vote prior to their entry to a polling place;

(e) refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial or ethnic composition of such districts is a factor in the decision to conduct, or the actual conduct of, such activities there and where a purpose or significant effect of such activities is to deter qualified voters from voting; and the conduct of such activities disproportionately in or directed towarddistricts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations shall be considered relevant evidence of the existence of such a factor and purpose;

(f) refrain from having private personnel deputized as law enforcement personnel in connection with ballot security activities.

The RNC also agreed that the RNC, its agents, servants, and employees would be bound by the Decree, “whether acting directly or indirectly through other party committees.”

Since 1982, that Consent Decree has been renewed every year by the original judge, Carter appointee District JudgeDickinson R. Debevoise, now 88 years old. Long retired, Debevoise comes back yearly for the sole purpose of renewing his 1982 order for another year.

In 1982, the Republican National Committee (“RNC”) and the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”) entered into a consent decree (the “Decree” or “Consent Decree”), which is national in scope, limiting the RNC’s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court’s approval in advance. The RNC appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey denying, in part, the RNC’s Motion to Vacate or Modify the Consent Decree. Although the District Court declined to vacate the Decree, it did make modifications to the Decree. The RNC argues that the District Court abused its discretion by modifying the Decree as it did and by declining to vacate the Decree. For the following reasons, we will affirm the District Court’s judgment.

Surprise! The judge who denied the RNC’s appeal to “vacate” the 1982 Consent Decree is an Obama appointee, Judge Joseph Greenaway, Jr., of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

Those four states, with a collective margin of 406,348 votes for Obama, add up to 69 electoral votes. Had Romney won 407,000 or so additional votes in the right proportion in those states, he would have 275 electoral votes.

All four states showed Romney ahead in the days leading up to the election. But on November 6, Romney lost all four states by a substantial margin, allof which have precincts that inexplicably went 99% for Obama, had voter registrations that exceeded their population, and had experienced problems with voting machines.

This election was stolen by the Democrats via vote fraud. Despite all the evidence of fraud, the Republican Party has been strangely silent about it.

Now you know why.

I’ll leave you with one last, even more disturbing thought:

The RNC and DNC made their Consent Decree 30 years ago, in 1982. The agreement in effect gives a carte blanche to the Democrat Party to commit vote fraud in every voting district across America that has, in the language of the Consent Decree, “a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations.” The term “substantial proportion” is not defined.

The Democrat Party knew this 30 years ago, more than enough time to put a plan in place to identify and groom their “perfect candidate” — in the words of Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) in 2008, a “light-skinned” black Democrat who has “no Negro dialect unless he wanted to have one.”

Being a black Democrat, this perfect candidate would get the support of almost all black Americans (96% in 2008!) and other racial minorities (two-thirds of Hispanics in 2008).

Being a “light-skinned” black with “no Negro dialect”, this perfect candidate would get the support of white Americans perpetually guilt-ridden about America’s original sin of slavery.

Now, we understand the significance of the account Tom Fife wrote during the 2008 presidential campaign. Fife, a U.S. government contractor, claims that in 1992 while he was visiting Moscow, a woman with undying allegiance to Soviet Communism (the Soviet Union had recently collapsed, on December 31, 1991) told him that a black man named Barack, born of a white American woman and an African male, was being groomed by communists to be, and would be elected, President of the United States.

In 2008, this “perfect candidate” won the presidential election. And despite his many failures in his first term, he would be reelected in 2012 for a second term via massive vote fraud. But nothing would be done about the vote fraud, because of that Consent Decree signed by the RNC 30 years ago.

The Republican Party is dead — and with it, the U.S. two-party system as well — and the sooner we voters recognize that the better.

The question that remains is whether the American Republic is also dead.

UPDATE (NOV. 16, 2012):

Since I published this post yesterday, we’ve been asking each other: “What can I/we do about this?” Here are my suggestions:

1. If you are a registered Republican, QUIT! Switch your voter registration ID to non-partisan Independent.

2. Stop donating money, not even one penny, to the GOP. Tell them why.

Just so you know: It makes no monetary difference to us how many people read this post. Fellowship of the Minds is an ad-free blog. We don’t make even a penny in revenue because we don’t have ads. All of our writers work our butts off, for no pay, as a labor of love for our country.